Sad thing is that my GPA is higher than most schools average. It is a shame that 4 long years of doing well in a higher instituion means nothing compared to a 1 4hr exam.

That's exactly how I felt about the SAT when I was applying to college. I did fine on it, but not as highly as I needed in order to get into all of my top choices. Luckily I got into one of my top choices, but I was definitely limited by an exam I thought had no bearing on my performance in college. I know that the LSAT is looked upon more strongly by law schools than the SAT was for colleges, so I'm not taking any chances. LSAT reigns supreme.

I owe my life to Swarthmore, no questions asked. They took a chance on me, and luckily for both of us it paid off. I know, it's annoying for a Swattie to complain. But I still stand against my hatred of the SAT (the LSAT, on the other hand, I believe is a fairly accurate measure of what you need to be able to do in order to be successful in law school. Not 100% accurate, but certainly more than the SAT is).

Logged

d1337

Both of the tests kind of suck. But I think they are one of the best ways to gauge ability/potential. I agree that the LSAT is better, because it deals with abilities which will definitely be relevant to law school. I have yet to take a math class in college.

I also have not taken a math class in college (I vowed never to take math again after high school). I do see how a background in math might help with the logic games (and to some extent the logical reasoning section), but a class in Logic would be better (duh). I'm not sure how it is at other schools, but Logic at my school is within the Philosophy department, which means that a humanities major can have the same advantages as a math major, assuming they take logic based classes.

You can transfer up, but only if two things happen: 1.) you do very well during your first year at whatever college you matriculated to (this implies law review, top 15%, in many cases top 10% or 5%, depending on the school you're transferring to) and 2.) that your stats (undergrad GPA, lsat score) are strong enough to have made you competitive as a first-year applicant. You'll have some leway if you have a relatively low lsat score, but not enough to get you into harvard if your lsat was sub-165 (sub-170 really). Just do well wherever you end up at, and aim at schools that are ranked above it within 10-20 positions (it is a little difficult to jump tiers, but certainly possible). I can't think of any schools that don't average lsat scores, but I think Penn is one of them assuming you score at least 5 points above your previous score (in your case, you'll need to improve your lsat score by at least 30 points to be competitive for Penn and comparable schools. If those schools average your score, you'll have no chance at them unless they feel very generous). Good luck with your second lsat exam and your second round of law school apps. It sucks you have to go through this again. Hopefully this time will work out for you better.

Good advice for the most part, except one thing -- actually, to transfer up you don't have to have an LSAT score on par with admitted students (there are exceptions...but Harvard is the only one I know of). It makes sense if you think about it. The LSAT predicts your law school performance, and once you've earned grades in law school, the LSAT is kind of moot.

Otherwise, solid advice. I agree that in many cases you'll probably need better than top 15% to transfer, though I've heard some schools (Wash U comes to mind) will take you as long as you're at least top 25%.

Oh, and other schools that don't average your LSAT scores include Minnesota, Cornell and Pitt (there are probably many more I can't think of off the top of my head).

d1337

"actually, to transfer up you don't have to have an LSAT score on par with admitted students"

TITCR

Many schools, as evidenced in recent articles about rankings manipulation, will take people with lower numbers because the numbers for transfer students are not factored in the USNWR formula. These students generate additional revenue, with proven ability to succeed, so they are not a threat to the rankings by a decrease in scores nor an increase in attrition rates. (NYU is a known example of a school that practices this policy.)

"actually, to transfer up you don't have to have an LSAT score on par with admitted students"

TITCR

Many schools, as evidenced in recent articles about rankings manipulation, will take people with lower numbers because the numbers for transfer students are not factored in the USNWR formula. These students generate additional revenue, with proven ability to succeed, so they are not a threat to the rankings by a decrease in scores nor an increase in attrition rates. (NYU is a known example of a school that practices this policy.)

Boalt also does this (with regards to GPA more so than LSAT), but they still will not accept you if they think you won't be able to handle the workload. Luckily, the LSAT is an indicator of first year performance (not second/third years), so if you've shown you can beat what is arguably the hardest year of law school by making law review or being in the top 10% of your class, then you should be good to go with an upward transfer, assuming everything else is in prime condition.

The problem is that when it comes to law school a good GPA for your institution is not necessarily a good GPA compared to the applicant pool. A 3.65 is just average compared to everyone else (trust me, I know, I had a 3.67) because of the level of student applying to law school. That's why they put more stock in the LSAT, the GPA isn't going to help unless it's closer to a 4, and you still would have had problems with a 135. They can pull a 3.65 out of anywhere. The problem is even if you talk to advisors at your school, not all of them understand the importance of the LSAT. Get kapalan, do TM, do something, and bring that score up! I know it sucks being in the PA area, because most of the PA schools and all of the NJ schools are top 100. But if you can just get that up closer to the 160 range, you'll definitely get in somewhere. Spend the year researching your ass off, make a reasonable list, and study, study, study!